In recent weeks, St. Vincent and the Grenadines (SVG) has been embroiled in a heated debate over whether dual citizens can serve in Parliament. This discussion, fueled by challenged nominations, impending court cases, and political strategizing, has been significantly shaped by the insights of legal experts Dr. Linton Lewis and Dr. Jason Haynes, who have provided a nuanced understanding of the constitutional framework. At the heart of this debate lies Section 25 of the SVG Constitution, which outlines the qualifications for parliamentary eligibility. Notably, the Constitution does not restrict eligibility to citizens of SVG alone but extends it to Commonwealth citizens. This deliberate choice reflects the drafters’ vision of a shared Commonwealth community, where individuals from across the region could participate in each other’s democratic institutions. Section 26, which addresses disqualifications, has been interpreted by some as a barrier to dual citizens. However, a closer reading suggests that the drafters intended to allow dual citizens, particularly those with Commonwealth ties, to serve in Parliament. The Constitution’s flexibility, designed to adapt to evolving social realities, underscores its role as a ‘living instrument.’ As the nation approaches election week, this constitutional interpretation remains a pivotal issue, highlighting the balance between inclusivity and legal precision.
Dual citizenship & Parliament — what the drafters really intended
